<p>I've heard about "hooks," and I know they help you get into college, but what exactly counts as a "hook" other than the regular normal things like being an athlete, playing an instrument, or having great essays/ECs/grades etc.</p>
<p>Please give examples.</p>
<p>Being a recruited athlete, a high achieving under-represented minority, a legacy (parent attended that school), development case (wealthy family with significant donation prospects), or child of someone very powerful, such as a US Senator.</p>
<p>Having great essays/grades/ec’s are not hooks; the things sherpa listed are.</p>
<p>I know essays and grades aren’t hooks.
That would be ridiculous, I simply stated that in my question because I did not want someone to state them in an answer. Of course I guess is was redundant because I stated athletic abilities as well, and once again it was restated.</p>
<p>I am curious because I have been reading posts by others and many claim to have “hooks,” which to me sound like they utterly bizarre to say the least.</p>
<p>“hooks” are features that the college actively searches for. This varies from “qualifications”. There a no other hooks besides what Sherpa listed. If you don’t have one, you can’t get one now.</p>
<p>What others claim as hooks, if not on that list, aren’t.</p>
<p>Actually being a first generation college student is a hook as well, which wasn’t mentioned.</p>
<p>A hook is some characteristic an applicant has that is of benefit <em>to the university</em> - rich, famous, minority, athlete, etc. </p>
<p>As a general rule an EC is something you do (music, art, etc), but a hook is something you <em>are.</em> Thus is it’s very difficult to develop a hook if you don’t have one.</p>
<p>Sometimes people use the word “hook” to mean a disguishing interest (ie, a girl in engineering, a highly ranked musician). And indeed, some adcoms use that definitions. But on CC, these are hooks:
</p>
<p>Thanks guys, now I fully understand. </p>
<p>I think there on many people on CC who misunderstand what hooks really are.</p>
<p>First generation is also a hook, is that right?</p>
<p>In a purely merit-based system such as many other countries have, admission decisions would be based entirely on standardized test scores, perhaps supplemented by grades, essays, or other performance factors. Some American universities, especially very selective private schools, also consider:</p>
<p>geographic, racial, ethnic, and economic diversity
first gen status
legacy status
fame
large financial contributions by parents or other relatives (a.k.a. “bribes” :))</p>
<p>These are “hooks”.</p>
<p>I don’t consider artistic or maybe also athletic talent in exactly the same category. However, there is some overlap and gray area. For example, if you play a less popular musical instrument or athletic position fairly well, but the school feels it needs to fill a gap in that role, then your ability might be considered a “hook”. In these cases the advantage comes as much from luck as exceptional merit.</p>
<p>I have read that Harvard admissions tags as many as 40% of its slots for “hooked” applicants. Understand, though, that most students accepted with hooks do also have very strong academic qualifications.</p>
<p>I have a question though. Why is first generation college student considered a hook? I’m one myself, and I don’t really see any difference.</p>
<p>Why would colleges look for first generation applicants? I’m curious. I don’t think that it would make them any better students?</p>
<p>jesko…Are you kidding? Athletics are probably the most influential hook of all. Have you not heard of the NCAA?</p>
<p>On the other hand…legacy is not as much of a hook as it once was according to sources (GC’s) at my son’s boarding school.</p>
<p>Sorry, jesko, I meant to address my comment to tk who stated that athletics were not as much of a hook. He might not be aware of the NCAA; sure doesn’t sound like it!</p>
<p>Athletics is not a hook, its a guarantee. As long as you have a 2.5 or something you get in. Especially for basketball and football–Do you think Duke cares what Kyrie Irving or Kyle Singler get in class? Absolutely not</p>
<p>Hooks-- Your dad knows the Admissions director, a phone call gets you in, you can pay full tuition, Your related to someone on the board, Legacy(at some schools), you know a very notable alumnus who writes a letter on your behalf, your parents make frequent donations to the school, your very friendly with the admissions director at an ivy league school and he calls / write a letter on your behalf</p>
<p>Don’t forget geographic area. A 2400 coming from rural Kansas is a lot more interesting than a 2400 from Manhattan.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It is not a hook. Indeed, it’s very hard for applicants with music ECs to stand out at all because there are so many musically proficient applicants.</p>
<p>You guys are arguing over whether or not musical talents and athletic abilities are hooks, but wouldn’t that depend on the school?</p>
<p>Obviously, if you play an instrument and you apply to a school that has many acclaimed musicians then that would not be a hook, but if you were exceptionally great then that would play in your favor, but not necessarily a hook. The same with athletics.</p>
<p>When applying to a very science based school like Caltech or MIT, being a good basketball player might mean something, but when you apply to Duke it would not hold such weight because at Duke one would need to be a GREAT ball player, probably even scouted by the coach.</p>
<p>Does this make sense?<br>
Logically, hooks depend on the school.</p>
<p>You guys are honestly that clueless that u think that playing basketball helps to get you in. If you ARE RECRUITED, OFFERED A SCHOLARSHIP is the only situation where it helps you. If you apply to, lets say to Northwestern(awesome school, awful basketball), playing bball in HS does nothing. 99% of the players on the team are recruited and offered a scholarship, regardless of grades</p>